Welcome To The:
    49ers Paradise Forum
                          It's What's Above The Fold
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
   
 
    Why am I seeing this ad?
 -If you are a Subscription Member (Black, Red, Gold) you are not signed in. Please sign-in to remove the ad.
-If you are a regular member or guest, read more about our subscription options here.

Get Your 49ers Merchandise and Support This Site! 49ers Store Click Here!
Please help support this site. Donations secured and encrypted by eBay.com. Even $1 can go a long way. Thank you.

Coast to Coast Tickets has the best seats for 49ers home games, as well as premium Athletics tickets, Giants baseball tickets and Sharks hockey tickets. And stay informed on what's got people buzzing by following Coast to Coast on Twitter!

The live chat room is always open. Join the following members already chatting.

* Home Help Login Register
49ersparadise.com FORUM  |  49ers Paradise  |  49ers Paradise - Literally!  |  Topic: John Thomas O'Sullivan 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 33 34 35 36 [37] Go Down Print
Author Topic: John Thomas O'Sullivan  (Read 17315 times)
TIM
Muted
Super Bowl MVP
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13106
Re: John Thomas O'Sullivan
« Reply #1080 on: November 07, 2008, 01:39:26 PM »
 Kiss
Logged
( JMHO )

JOE MONTANA IS
lord of The Rings.


GET SIX !!!
D-roc
Super Bowl MVP
*****
Online Online

Posts: 62057
Re: John Thomas O'Sullivan
« Reply #1081 on: November 07, 2008, 02:04:12 PM »
J.T. O'Sullivan. If all publicity is good publicity, consider this year a roaring success for O'Sullivan. Sure, at various times this season he led the NFL in interceptions, sacks and fumbles. But he also was an eight-game starter, which is better than most quarterbacks who appear in the NFL. He showed he has excellent command on the field, a good arm, above average accuracy and a surprising degree of escapability. Any team looking to add a quarterback, including the 49ers, will have to consider O'Sullivan a cut above the run-of-the-mill list of backups.

The problem is that O'Sullivan is inextricably tied to Mike Martz. And that's bad for two reasons. For one, many teams will assume that O'Sullivan's eye-catching statistics are due to Martz's system. (If that's true, then so are his turnovers and sacks). Second, there's a good chance Martz won't be back next season. He was Nolan's - not Scot McCloughan's - choice as offensive coordinator and there's a growing sense that his scheme peaked in December 2000 and won't work with the players McCloughan has drafted. O'Sullivan never would have been brought to San Francisco if Martz were not the offensive coordinator. If Martz leaves, it only stands to reason that JTO goes with him.
Chance of returning: 38 percent.

http://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/49ers/archives/016813.html

I hope we let both of them walk.
Logged
TIM
Muted
Super Bowl MVP
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13106
Re: John Thomas O'Sullivan
« Reply #1082 on: November 07, 2008, 02:58:49 PM »
Quote from: D-roc on November 07, 2008, 02:04:12 PM
He showed he has excellent command on the field, a good arm, above average accuracy and a surprising degree of escapability. Any team looking to add a quarterback, including the 49ers, will have to consider O'Sullivan a cut above the run-of-the-mill list of backups.

http://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/49ers/archives/016813.html

I hope we let both of them walk.

All that will play itself out over the next two months. What I am more worried about is who will the Niners draft / get at QB for the future. Too bad,that like 2005,there really are not many special QB's coming out in the draft ,unless we get a surprise.

The coaching staff situation will be resolved over the next couple of months and will be interesting to watch. But who will Scotty (if he is not dumped) and the HC etc have on the roster to play QB ? Without something special at QB,the HC had better be a genius and then some ! I think that the O line has enough good material to work with so that a really good O line coach could come in here and create a safe place for a QB to work from. BUT who will that be ?
---------------------------------------------------

From MM today...
 
"And J.T. is going to do really well. He just kind of hit the wall a little bit. . . . He just needs to step back and regroup and get his breath back. He'll be an outstanding player."

 When asked if it's difficult to get O'Sullivan out of the lineup, Martz said, "I hate to see him go through this, but I'm excited for the opportunity for Shaun. To say I'm closer to J.T. than Shaun would not be accurate. That's not the case at all. Anytime you have somebody go through something like that, you have to feel for them. It's been hard on him. He's going to be a good player, but he has to fight through this, and we have to help him with it. He'll end up doing really well in his career. He'll be back. When that is, who knows? In the immediate future, Shaun has a great opportunity."



And from M.B....
http://www.sacbee.com/sf49ers/story/1378496.html
Logged
( JMHO )

JOE MONTANA IS
lord of The Rings.


GET SIX !!!
DC9er
Content Coordinator
Starter
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 518
Re: John Thomas O'Sullivan
« Reply #1083 on: November 07, 2008, 03:54:12 PM »
"First off, the NFL is not fair"

or something like that? I'm officially pressing the ignore button on everything Martz says. He's just as full of it as Nolan was.
Logged
commoncents
Content Coordinator
Super Bowl MVP
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5387


LB with WR Speed
Re: John Thomas O'Sullivan
« Reply #1084 on: November 07, 2008, 05:15:08 PM »
Quote from: TIM on November 07, 2008, 01:14:51 PM
Quote from: commoncents on November 07, 2008, 07:42:14 AM
the offense does their job most of the time!? Since when?
As a general rule this year,the offense has moved the ball on every defense they have faced ( a HUGE difference from recent years) and that is their job,that they have done MOST of the time.THE point IS that without the turnovers they are not bad at all and even with the turnovers they played well enough to win several games IF the defense was mediocre or better.
The defense has just been bad throughout. They have not stopped anyone and that is the only job of a defense,so therefore they stink at their only purpose.
The job of the offense is to move the ball and score. They have done the first against all defenses and have scored enough to win several games that the defense gave away .
If the defense was average or better (I am NOT talking about useless stats but actual performance) then they could have even overcome SOME of those stupid turnovers and pulled a few games out of the turnover fire.
And yes,if JT had not turned over the ball nearly as much then possibly the offense could have won a couple of games by themselves ,even with the defense giving up yards and scores like they were betting against themselves .
Put it this way,if the defense was playing well ,we probably overcome the turnover parade in all but 2 games,where JT went unusually crazy with the turnovers. We were scoring in most of those games but were not stopping the other teams from scoring more.

The defense has been worse than the offense all year long AND IT HAS NOT EVEN BEEN THAT CLOSE,even with the turnovers !  But they both have been under performing. So I guess the argument loses it's luster a bit when the discussion is which stinks more the D or the O,as opposed to which is the better unit.

Wrong, by a long shot. BOTH the offense and the Defense have been bad. The offenses job is to SCORE POINTS, not just move the ball. Turnovers are on the Offense so they are not doing their job when they are turning the ball over, dropping passes, and going 3 and out.

It seems like you are giving the offense a pass on the TOvers which is wrong. You want the D to continue to save the offense. It goes both ways. The offenses  MAIN job is to SCORE, and the Defenses job is to STOP other teams from scoring. Neither has done their job well. There should be no excuse of "We could overcome the Turnovers if the D did it's job". If the offense would do it's job there wouldnt be any TO's in the first place.

Also the offense has been getting a lot of help from SpecialTeams, Joe Nedney and the blocked FGs for TD's so i really hope you werent including that with the offense points. you take away Joe Nedney and the ST's and the offense looks even worse...
Logged
"I'm not sure fans can appreciate the balance of Steve Mariucci, nor will they ever." - Chris Collinsworth during the 2003 WildCard playoff g
TIM
Muted
Super Bowl MVP
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13106
Re: John Thomas O'Sullivan
« Reply #1085 on: November 07, 2008, 06:28:02 PM »
Quote from: commoncents on November 07, 2008, 05:15:08 PM
Quote from: TIM on November 07, 2008, 01:14:51 PM
Quote from: commoncents on November 07, 2008, 07:42:14 AM
the offense does their job most of the time!? Since when?
As a general rule this year,the offense has moved the ball on every defense they have faced ( a HUGE difference from recent years) and that is their job,that they have done MOST of the time.THE point IS that without the turnovers they are not bad at all and even with the turnovers they played well enough to win several games IF the defense was mediocre or better.
The defense has just been bad throughout. They have not stopped anyone and that is the only job of a defense,so therefore they stink at their only purpose.
The job of the offense is to move the ball and score. They have done the first against all defenses and have scored enough to win several games that the defense gave away .
If the defense was average or better (I am NOT talking about useless stats but actual performance) then they could have even overcome SOME of those stupid turnovers and pulled a few games out of the turnover fire.
And yes,if JT had not turned over the ball nearly as much then possibly the offense could have won a couple of games by themselves ,even with the defense giving up yards and scores like they were betting against themselves .
Put it this way,if the defense was playing well ,we probably overcome the turnover parade in all but 2 games,where JT went unusually crazy with the turnovers. We were scoring in most of those games but were not stopping the other teams from scoring more.

The defense has been worse than the offense all year long AND IT HAS NOT EVEN BEEN THAT CLOSE,even with the turnovers ! But they both have been under performing. So I guess the argument loses it's luster a bit when the discussion is which stinks more the D or the O,as opposed to which is the better unit.

Wrong, by a long shot. BOTH the offense and the Defense have been bad.

Common,Common,Common,...I already said that several times. We are arguing about which unit is the worst ,not which is good or better. (isn't that sad ? LOL )

And I have said several times that the offense HAS scored enough to win several more games than we have won,but the defense lost the game because they were less than mediocre.
The offense has done pretty well ,especially considering how bad they have been over the last couple of years. They had soooo many turnovers it was embarrassing BUT if they had not had about 1/2 of those turnovers you would be talking about how really good they are. Turnovers ruined the year for the offense,I have always said that. But they can move the ball and they have scored enough to win games or at least be in games BUT the defense has NOT played well enough to win games or even keep us in many.
Logged
( JMHO )

JOE MONTANA IS
lord of The Rings.


GET SIX !!!
westcoastguy
Super Bowl MVP
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4437
Re: John Thomas O'Sullivan
« Reply #1086 on: November 08, 2008, 09:36:47 PM »
No one can argue that JT has played poorly for the past month.  There's no way around it and it's a big reason why we have lost a couple of the games we did.
Logged
Shanahan in 2010!
commoncents
Content Coordinator
Super Bowl MVP
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5387


LB with WR Speed
Re: John Thomas O'Sullivan
« Reply #1087 on: November 09, 2008, 07:18:14 AM »
Quote from: TIM on November 07, 2008, 06:28:02 PM
Quote from: commoncents on November 07, 2008, 05:15:08 PM
Quote from: TIM on November 07, 2008, 01:14:51 PM
Quote from: commoncents on November 07, 2008, 07:42:14 AM
the offense does their job most of the time!? Since when?
As a general rule this year,the offense has moved the ball on every defense they have faced ( a HUGE difference from recent years) and that is their job,that they have done MOST of the time.THE point IS that without the turnovers they are not bad at all and even with the turnovers they played well enough to win several games IF the defense was mediocre or better.
The defense has just been bad throughout. They have not stopped anyone and that is the only job of a defense,so therefore they stink at their only purpose.
The job of the offense is to move the ball and score. They have done the first against all defenses and have scored enough to win several games that the defense gave away .
If the defense was average or better (I am NOT talking about useless stats but actual performance) then they could have even overcome SOME of those stupid turnovers and pulled a few games out of the turnover fire.
And yes,if JT had not turned over the ball nearly as much then possibly the offense could have won a couple of games by themselves ,even with the defense giving up yards and scores like they were betting against themselves .
Put it this way,if the defense was playing well ,we probably overcome the turnover parade in all but 2 games,where JT went unusually crazy with the turnovers. We were scoring in most of those games but were not stopping the other teams from scoring more.

The defense has been worse than the offense all year long AND IT HAS NOT EVEN BEEN THAT CLOSE,even with the turnovers ! But they both have been under performing. So I guess the argument loses it's luster a bit when the discussion is which stinks more the D or the O,as opposed to which is the better unit.

Wrong, by a long shot. BOTH the offense and the Defense have been bad.

Common,Common,Common,...I already said that several times. We are arguing about which unit is the worst ,not which is good or better. (isn't that sad ? LOL )

And I have said several times that the offense HAS scored enough to win several more games than we have won,but the defense lost the game because they were less than mediocre.
The offense has done pretty well ,especially considering how bad they have been over the last couple of years. They had soooo many turnovers it was embarrassing BUT if they had not had about 1/2 of those turnovers you would be talking about how really good they are. Turnovers ruined the year for the offense,I have always said that. But they can move the ball and they have scored enough to win games or at least be in games BUT the defense has NOT played well enough to win games or even keep us in many.

It doesnt matter who is worse. NEITHER unit is doing their job. Have they (Offense) really did enough TIM? Lets look at the last 5 games...

9/28     @Saints     L     17-31 TOP:  49ers 27:05 Saints 32:55

14 points by the offense.  Two(?) Picks by JTO in the endzone and a fumble lost. Yes, the offense put up enough to win, if we had stellar D which we dont. Just like we are suppose to have an offense that averages 45 points a game but we dont...

10/5    Patriots            L    21-30

21 points.TOP 19 mins in favor of the Pats and JTO had 3 INT's which didnt help the cause. So again, neither did there job.

10/12    Eagles            L    26-40

Nedney 4 FG's and a Blocked punt for 7, that's 19 points so the offense only scored 1 offensive TD. Special Teams scored more than the offense did. Maybe of those 4 FG's had been TD's we could have won. 3 INT's for JTO, one being a pick 6

10/19    @Giants    L    17-29 TOP 49er 25:30 Giants   34:30

Blocked punt for a TD and a Nedney FG means 7 points by the offense. Once again, ST scores more. 2 int's for JT and a lost fumble


10/26    Seahawks    L    13-34

I'll just get to the point here. 0 points with JTO(FG by Nedney)  in the first half, 7 With Hill(FG by Nedney)



So again. BOTH are bad. One isnt worse than the other because NEITHER unit is doing what they are getting paid to do
Logged
"I'm not sure fans can appreciate the balance of Steve Mariucci, nor will they ever." - Chris Collinsworth during the 2003 WildCard playoff g
DC9er
Content Coordinator
Starter
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 518
Re: John Thomas O'Sullivan
« Reply #1088 on: November 09, 2008, 08:25:46 AM »
Um, that all looks alot worse for the offense. Especially the Eagles Game and the Patriots game. What was the longest drive (in terms of TOP) for JTO in this offense. If you're looking at that stat, the offense needs to stay on the field. Sustained Drives. JTO did not have many of those. I'll look it up, but I'm pretty sure JTO did not do much to keep the defense off the field. The defense has not been great, but when your offense has the ball for 2-3 minutes, your D has MOST of the pressure. This is why Martz offenses are so deceptive. In his winning seasons, he's been in the top ten for TOP. Without it, his teams lose. This is a fact that's been seriously overlooked. If his offenses don't hold the ball, or score every time they have it,  his teams CANNOT win.

Again, this is a BAD offense, and a Defense that's not capable of winning the game on their own.
Logged
TIM
Muted
Super Bowl MVP
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13106
Re: John Thomas O'Sullivan
« Reply #1089 on: November 10, 2008, 12:55:21 PM »
With a decent defense and a few less turnovers on offense we would be doing pretty well right now,imho.  The defense was supposed to be the strong point of the team. It has not been, by a long shot (the defense has been the worst unit of the 3 on the field all season so far. But as I have said all along,the O and the D both need to be much improved. )

The offense has many deep flaws but is doing much better than last year and if the QB can hold onto the ball we would all be pretty happy with the offense this season(even with the O line being a project). The defense has just plain been a pushover for every offense that plays them.
But I don't think the defensive roster is sooo bad that they can't play much better if the scheme is better. I like the defense and only see a few changes in personnel that really NEED to be made ,that along with a new attitude and better scheme and they will be just fine.
We suck on both sides of the ball in several ways BUT I don't think we are all that far away from having a good team. HIRE ME and I will fix it all !!!    Grin Cool Wink
Logged
( JMHO )

JOE MONTANA IS
lord of The Rings.


GET SIX !!!
commoncents
Content Coordinator
Super Bowl MVP
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5387


LB with WR Speed
Re: John Thomas O'Sullivan
« Reply #1090 on: November 10, 2008, 02:09:28 PM »
It's more than just turnovers with the offense.

But I agree. I really think it comes down to COACHING. We have talent, no question at all. Guys just are not playing discipline.
Logged
"I'm not sure fans can appreciate the balance of Steve Mariucci, nor will they ever." - Chris Collinsworth during the 2003 WildCard playoff g
TIM
Muted
Super Bowl MVP
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13106
Re: John Thomas O'Sullivan
« Reply #1091 on: November 10, 2008, 02:19:12 PM »
Quote from: commoncents on November 10, 2008, 02:09:28 PM
It's more than just turnovers with the offense.

But I agree. I really think it comes down to COACHING. We have talent, no question at all. Guys just are not playing discipline.

Sure it is more than JUST the turnovers BUT even with the turnover parade ,the offense still looks worlds better than last years offense. And IF the turnovers get cut in half or better then we have a pretty good NFL offense !  Keep every turnover we have this year and take away every turnover on last years offense and this years offense would still be better than last year. (except for the few games where Hill played last year).
That's why ball security is #1 on that new sign MS had put up all over the facility in SC,because turnovers have been THE downfall of the offense this year. Not the only problem (see O line ) but the main problem..
I think #1 should have been "please tackle someone on defense and please stop some teams offense on 3rd down etc .lol .
Logged
( JMHO )

JOE MONTANA IS
lord of The Rings.


GET SIX !!!
DC9er
Content Coordinator
Starter
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 518
Re: John Thomas O'Sullivan
« Reply #1092 on: November 10, 2008, 03:59:37 PM »
If 50% of our drives last longer than 3 minutes we'll win.
Logged
TIM
Muted
Super Bowl MVP
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13106
Re: John Thomas O'Sullivan
« Reply #1093 on: November 10, 2008, 04:15:15 PM »
My drive to work lasts longer than 3 minutes !!!  I am a winner !!!
Logged
( JMHO )

JOE MONTANA IS
lord of The Rings.


GET SIX !!!
indianajim
Content Editor
Pro Bowler
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2443



WWW
Re: John Thomas O'Sullivan
« Reply #1094 on: November 12, 2008, 11:38:48 AM »
50% of my drives last longer than three minutes....  Kiss
Logged

Click Clack! aka Pro Bowl!
twinspapa
Co-Admin
Super Bowl MVP
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8032


Back To The Playoffs In 2009!


WWW
Re: John Thomas O'Sullivan
« Reply #1095 on: November 17, 2008, 12:20:05 AM »
Hey back to the actual topic......

JTO did get to play today and I don't know for sure but I don't think he turned the ball over  Smiley
Logged
NOLAninerfan
Veteran
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 896

I hate the Cowboys too
Re: John Thomas O'Sullivan
« Reply #1096 on: November 17, 2008, 12:01:56 PM »
Quote from: twinspapa on November 17, 2008, 12:20:05 AM
Hey back to the actual topic......

JTO did get to play today and I don't know for sure but I don't think he turned the ball over Smiley

Yeah but he was sacked once I think...just to remind him the pain :-)
Logged
flacksaw
Starter
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 671
Re: John Thomas O'Sullivan
« Reply #1097 on: November 17, 2008, 02:12:25 PM »
He did get to throw ONE ball.  It was a drop.  Still it was prettier than any of the ducks that Hill put up all game.  It's just too bad he can't seem to stop himself from throwing turnovers and trying to keep dead plays alive too long resulting in a fumble.  If he could eliminate the picks/fumbles he'd be our best QB by far, he throws the best ball of any of them.  I guess you'd have to say that JTO is just not as "clutch" as Hill is and that Hill plays smarter and that makes all the difference in the world.  Hill takes what the defense gives him whereas JTO tries to take too much and forces the ball in there too often. 

Still Hill threw up some UGLY ducks yesterday and if he puts those up versus good defenses (like Dallas, Buffalo etc.) it's not going to end well. 
Logged
More Scoring, Less SNORING!
twinspapa
Co-Admin
Super Bowl MVP
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8032


Back To The Playoffs In 2009!


WWW
Re: John Thomas O'Sullivan
« Reply #1098 on: November 17, 2008, 03:48:47 PM »
I saw the sacks in the stats and I was wondering if any of them was during garbage time w/JTO....
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 33 34 35 36 [37] Go Up Print 
Share |
49ersparadise.com FORUM  |  49ers Paradise  |  49ers Paradise - Literally!  |  Topic: John Thomas O'Sullivan « previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!